I own this 2 beast and I also quit confusing to compare this smartphone which is the best one. I like the speed of O2X, but dislike it ui or interface if compare to DHD htc sense. I also like DHD aluminum body more than O2X plastic. So, what do you think guys? which one is better?
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Any one? just to know your opinion.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
is there a massive speed difference?
Well the biggest difference is probably that Dual Core processor of the O2X (2 x 1GHz) while the DHD only has a single core (also 1GHz).
The main camera is similar, but the O2X is capable of 1080p video recording AND additionally has a front faced camera for video calls.
It has also got more internal storage (8GB) and a slightly better battery (1500 mAH)
So yeah, I would say that the O2X is better than the DHD.
frosty_ice said:
Well the biggest difference is probably that Dual Core processor of the O2X (2 x 1GHz) while the DHD only has a single core (also 1GHz).
The main camera is similar, but the O2X is capable of 1080p video recording AND additionally has a front faced camera for video calls.
It has also got more internal storage (8GB) and a slightly better battery (1500 mAH)
So yeah, I would say that the O2X is better than the DHD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeh but it has an extremely buggy ui. the speed test show it beats the dhd in web browsing by 1-2 seconds. also some benchmark test show the dhd scoring higher.
also the dualcore phones dont have 2x 1GHz cpu... the total speed is 1ghz
so its (2x 500mhz) this is more efficient than single core.
olyloh6696 said:
also the dualcore phones dont have 2x 1GHz cpu... the total speed is 1ghz
so its (2x 500mhz) this is more efficient than single core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Say what?!
A 1ghz dual core processor is not 2 processors running at 500mhz!!! It is a single CPU with 2 cores capable of processing separate threads. It runs at 1ghz and technically it is like 2 1ghz processors operating in tandem.
Shoot whoever is spreading the above misinformation lol.
Regards.
lynxboy said:
Say what?!
A 1ghz dual core processor is not 2 processors running at 500mhz!!! It is a single CPU with 2 cores capable of processing separate threads. It runs at 1ghz and technically it is like 2 1ghz processors operating in tandem.
Shoot whoever is spreading the above misinformation lol.
Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure?? I have read everywhere it is 500mhz!! Othwise why do manufactureas say it is a 1.2ghz dualcore phone?! Why dont they say it is a 2.4ghz phone? I think you may be wrong
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
olyloh6696 said:
Are you sure?? I have read everywhere it is 500mhz!! Othwise why do manufactureas say it is a 1.2ghz dualcore phone?! Why dont they say it is a 2.4ghz phone? I think you may be wrong
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He is definitely right.
You can't just add the speeds of two seperate cores up. The dual core runs at 2 @ 1Ghz. That's like two seperate CPUs, each with a clock speed of 1Ghz. So it is NOT 2 Ghz CPU but rather 2 processors @ 1Ghz. It may sound similar, but it makes a huge difference (for further detail you should look into how a processor works and what threads are).
frosty_ice said:
He is definitely right.
You can't just add the speeds of two seperate cores up. The dual core runs at 2 @ 1Ghz. That's like two seperate CPUs, each with a clock speed of 1Ghz. So it is NOT 2 Ghz CPU but rather 2 processors @ 1Ghz. It may sound similar, but it makes a huge difference (for further detail you should look into how a processor works and what threads are).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats explain alot why bench mark for stock rom O2X is 2689 and DHD only around 1545.
thanks guys for your info, keep it coming.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
frosty_ice said:
He is definitely right.
You can't just add the speeds of two seperate cores up. The dual core runs at 2 @ 1Ghz. That's like two seperate CPUs, each with a clock speed of 1Ghz. So it is NOT 2 Ghz CPU but rather 2 processors @ 1Ghz. It may sound similar, but it makes a huge difference (for further detail you should look into how a processor works and what threads are).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so i'm right?
olyloh6696 said:
so i'm right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, lynx is The O2X CPU runs at 1Ghz per core.
olyloh6696 said:
so i'm right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just google about dual core vs single core.
You will find info where dual core freq is same as single core. The only different is that dual core is way better when doing multitasking (avoid hang or jitter) and not to say double speed but can say nearly double speed.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
frosty_ice said:
No, lynx is The O2X CPU runs at 1Ghz per core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks, but why does it say for ecample that the htc sensation runs at 1.2 ghz? If they want to be more impressive, why dont they just say its running at 2.4 ghz?
Ok guys, it is clearly in term of hardware O2X is the winner. But how about its ui? software? And its unibody design? any opinion i do appreciate.
Thanks.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Im not an expert but correct me if im wrong.
1 CPU with 2 core. Each core have 1 ghz freq. 1 core to do 1 task, another core to do another task. Meaning freq each core still 1 ghz but since its have dual core it can do both task at the same time. More quick than a single core. If we compare to single core with 2 ghz, it can only do task 1 at a time. In term of speed i think dual core 1 ghz should be nearly the same as 1 core 2 ghz. I also read some where saying single core 2 ghz consume more power than dual core 1 ghz.
Just my 2 cent.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Dual Core Processors
olyloh6696 said:
Are you sure?? I have read everywhere it is 500mhz!! Othwise why do manufactureas say it is a 1.2ghz dualcore phone?! Why dont they say it is a 2.4ghz phone? I think you may be wrong
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
olyloh6696 said:
thanks, but why does it say for ecample that the htc sensation runs at 1.2 ghz? If they want to be more impressive, why dont they just say its running at 2.4 ghz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm 100% sure. Here's a brief history of multi core processors for those who are interested.
In the late 90's and early 000's, processor speed was constantly on the rise. Manufacturers were trying to out-do each other in regards to who had the fastest clock speed.
The way clock speed increases is by actually shrinking the microarchitecture (Semi-Conductors) of the processor, which leads to faster data transfer/processing rates. There was a pattern involved where each new generation of chip architecture yielded almost twice the clock speed of the past generation. However, as processor architecture grew smaller and smaller, eventually we approached a stage where physically, using current materials and manufacturing processes, a limit had been reached. It wasn't possible to continue shrinking the size of the processor, so logically, the next step was to integrate multiple cores on a single chip. This was the birth of the multicore processor.
The way a multicore processor works is by utilising multiple processor cores on a single chip. This way, instead of a higher clock speed, you have multiple cores running at the same speed, 'sharing' the workload. So, a 1ghz Dual Core Processor is a single chip, with 2 cores both clocked at 1ghz. A 3ghz Quad Core Processor is a single chip, with 4 cores all clocked at 3ghz.
This all sounds wonderful, but for a multicore processor to be used efficiently, it requires software to be multithreaded. This is where you have to question the use of dual core processors in smartphones, as none of the applications or the OS utilise multiple threads! So really, as it stands, you'll struggle to see truly improved performance from dual core handsets.
This will all change in the future. Android 2.4 will support dual cores by default and I'm guessing most software will start to aswell.
Anway, hope this was interesting for those wondering how dual core processors work and about clock speed etc.
Regards.
Well i have both phones now... i missed the sence weather and clock from DHD but fancy widget fixed that. O2x still has a few bugs ie black screen and auto reboots but i only had 1 bs a 2 reboots in 2 weeks now . games work better on o2x also with normal lock screen o2x is snapper all over at stock than a oc to 1.2 ghz DHD but the best part is the real HDMI out (no need for a ps3) but i will keep both phones
olyloh6696 said:
thanks, but why does it say for ecample that the htc sensation runs at 1.2 ghz? If they want to be more impressive, why dont they just say its running at 2.4 ghz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they would be lying. If I have two towers each being 50m tall I can't advertise that I'm selling a 100m tower because I'm not.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
lynxboy said:
I'm 100% sure. Here's a brief history of multi core processors for those who are interested.
In the late 90's and early 000's, processor speed was constantly on the rise. Manufacturers were trying to out-do each other in regards to who had the fastest clock speed.
The way clock speed increases is by actually shrinking the microarchitecture (Semi-Conductors) of the processor, which leads to faster data transfer/processing rates. There was a pattern involved where each new generation of chip architecture yielded almost twice the clock speed of the past generation. However, as processor architecture grew smaller and smaller, eventually we approached a stage where physically, using current materials and manufacturing processes, a limit had been reached. It wasn't possible to continue shrinking the size of the processor, so logically, the next step was to integrate multiple cores on a single chip. This was the birth of the multicore processor.
The way a multicore processor works is by utilising multiple processor cores on a single chip. This way, instead of a higher clock speed, you have multiple cores running at the same speed, 'sharing' the workload. So, a 1ghz Dual Core Processor is a single chip, with 2 cores both clocked at 1ghz. A 3ghz Quad Core Processor is a single chip, with 4 cores all clocked at 3ghz.
This all sounds wonderful, but for a multicore processor to be used efficiently, it requires software to be multithreaded. This is where you have to question the use of dual core processors in smartphones, as none of the applications or the OS utilise multiple threads! So really, as it stands, you'll struggle to see truly improved performance from dual core handsets.
This will all change in the future. Android 2.4 will support dual cores by default and I'm guessing most software will start to aswell.
Anway, hope this was interesting for those wondering how dual core processors work and about clock speed etc.
Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for that! it helped me understand it abit more, cheers
but isnt the nexus s the developers phone? so android 2.4 must not just require dual core as the nexus s will be getting the 2.4 update?
letom said:
Because they would be lying. If I have two towers each being 50m tall I can't advertise that I'm selling a 100m tower because I'm not.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i see you logic now
but you could say in total you have 100m tower? so could you say i have a 2.4 ghz clocked phone?
Related
I know A free one is in development.but I cannot find any other information on it. Any idea when more info will be released?
Sent from my eris
Not psx4droid right?
Sent from my Eris using XDA App
I know one is out, but don't expect it to work on the eris. Its going to need a decent gpu.
Yeah, it doesn't work well on the Eris a little laggy-- but i just tried it with Chrono Cross maybe different games have better frame rates? Hope this helps!
They say they might be coming out with dual core snapdragons in the near future. I can't wait! DS games on my phone might be cool.
This will be a million times better with a dual core processor.
Processor doesn't make a phone though. GPU's in phones need to come a long way to really see the affects of 2gHz processors. Honestly I don't care if you have 4 gHz in your phone, if you have the ram of an Eris it won't be that much speedier then an Eris. All things need to be improved or else it is just a bottle-neck.
Well this is almost certainly like computer emulation where it's nearly 100% based on CPU and the GPU does virtually nothing. The threads just aren't sent through the GPU on an emulator because it's way too complication. So two cores will in fact have a very large thread on multithreaded emulation.
Yeah, I see where you're coming from there. I read online that if you had hardware 10x the original, you could emulate a device perfectly. Technically that makes the DS an ok candidate for a snapdragon phone. The DS has two processors that clock at 67 and 33 mHz. That makes it having 100mHz of processor. (I was surprised how little of a processor it actually has.) Do the math. If a snapdragon clocks at 1024mHz (1gHz) then 1000mHz would emulate it fine. That's all hypothetically speaking though. Games would probably still lag on a Droid X or Incredible. Could happen. I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
PSX, maybe that could be nice, but when my phone can emulate Gamecube and Xbox1, times will be good.
The issue is that dual core processors are exponentially faster than single core. A dual core 500 mhz processor does not equate a single core 1ghz processor in fact it's much closer to a 2ghz processor in benchmark scores if not higher.
I thought the complete opposite. Dual 1.5gHz vs. 3gHz, 3 gets the win for me. My lappy is a dual 2.13gHz and it doesn't seem like 4.26. Just my thoughts, I haven't actually run tests to verify this. Computing wise, a lot of applications only use one core. There in lies the problem with dual core. Plus, why do you call that an issue?
Well it's simply an issue at the moment because of the fact that phones only have one core is all.
And dual cores will always outpower single cores because of the increase in L3 cache size, which literally does not exist on a single core processor. The L3 Cache increases the speed of a dual or multi core processor by quite a lot.
edit: And a lot of emulators utilize multicores, if not all.
Just saying, this is a huge step forward though. It's just a matter of splitting the threads.
CPCookieMan said:
I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best solution for this would be using another controller with bluetooth. I know most of the iphone (and a few of the android) emulators can sync with a wiimote to avoid awful on-screen buttons.
Hi all.
I was questioning myself if the motorola xoom has two cores of 1ghz each one, Or both together have 1Ghz...?
Can Someone answer this?
p.d. Sorry 4 my bad english.
Both cores will be 1 GHZ.
solarnz said:
Both cores will be 1 GHZ.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, it has 2 cores of 500mhz each one?
Ifiuse said:
So, it has 2 cores of 500mhz each one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1 core / 1ghz.
1 CPU...two cores...1ghz per core...1ghz total
Sent from my Xoom
Thanks u. Regards.
Im an Electronic Engineer so forgive my not understanding peoples confusion with the ghz thing but ...
Frequency is a rate, its speed, this is not a volume or value, were aren't saying they have 2MB of memory, is it 2 each or 1, 1.
Time runs at 1hz for me, as it does for everyone else in the world, do we share the 1hz or is it equal?
The hardware design determines the clock frequency of a cpu core, it doesn't, matter if you have a single for 1ghz, 2 core 1ghz or 20480 core 1ghz,
As long as those cores are they same, they run on the same clock.
To ask if they share the clock time would be like saying I have a guy that can do 2 sums every time the sun rises, now I have 2 guys that can do two sums every time the sun rises, do they do ne each? No, sun rises once a day and each of them does two sums, so you get twice as much work out of them in the same amount of time.
That might raise the question, well, while dont we just have 50 cores?
Well, its expensive to manufacture, its subject to low yield, it expensive and power consuming, also software has to be written to take advantage of all the cores (if you don't have enough sums to give your two guys, they can't give you results, right?)
Anyway, point is, the frequency is a rate, and don't for a moment assume that higher frequency automatically means more powerful processing. (Its true to an extent, but only within the same architecture.)
Macbots drool as I XOOM through the Galaxy to my hearts Desire.
good analogy, I use the car & highway one... 2 cars 1 lane for single core or 2 lanes and 1 car on each lane for dual core..
so? total=1ghz for all or total=2(1ghz) im slow
lchingonl said:
so? total=1ghz for all or total=2(1ghz) im slow
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol, there is no _total_!
1GHz is the frequency that the CPU core clock runs at, they all run the same, on the same clock, 1 core, 2 cores, ten cores.
You need to understand this concept that "total" doesn't apply here.
This is not "1GHz per core", the core clock frequency is 1GHz, and there are two cores, they BOTH run at 1GHz.
This is the first dual core I've had, and I don't know much about the technology.
What's the difference between a dual core cpu running @ 1GHz and a single core running @ 2 GHz?
Psychokitty said:
This is the first dual core I've had, and I don't know much about the technology.
What's the difference between a dual core cpu running @ 1GHz and a single core running @ 2 GHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2 cores both running at 1ghz still equals 1ghz...1 core running at 2ghz equals 2ghz.
Lets try this:
If two cars are both going down the road at 60mph, how long does it take them to go 60 miles? Even though there is 2 of them, both running the same speed, it still takes 1 hour. Hope this helps you understand.
Am I right in believing that with two 1ghz cores, there would be no benefit in speed unless the app or OS were specifically designed to utilize both cores? My understanding was that if you had two 1ghz cores, and the app was programmed to utilize both cores, each core would handle it's own load. Is this wrong?
Does two 1ghz cores truly equal 2x the speed if the app is programmed to use both?
deepducky said:
Am I right in believing that with two 1ghz cores, there would be no benefit in speed unless the app or OS were specifically designed to utilize both cores? My understanding was that if you had two 1ghz cores, and the app was programmed to utilize both cores, each core would handle it's own load. Is this wrong?
Does two 1ghz cores truly equal 2x the speed if the app is programmed to use both?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it depends on the application's workload more rather than the programming. If the application can split its workload into parts that can be done in parallel, you get a speed increase. However, if the application relies completely on having to have one part that cannot be broken up into parallel-running parts, then you will get absolutely no benefit from a multiple-core processor.
Mostly, dual-core processors are about *efficiency* rather than *speed*. Here's a good analogy. It's about being able to walk and chew gum at the same time, rather than having to walk a bit, stop, chew gum for a bit, stop, walk a bit more, stop, etc.
ydaraishy said:
No, it depends on the application's workload more rather than the programming. If the application can split its workload into parts that can be done in parallel, you get a speed increase. However, if the application relies completely on having to have one part that cannot be broken up into parallel-running parts, then you will get absolutely no benefit from a multiple-core processor.
Mostly, dual-core processors are about *efficiency* rather than *speed*. Here's a good analogy. It's about being able to walk and chew gum at the same time, rather than having to walk a bit, stop, chew gum for a bit, stop, walk a bit more, stop, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In addition, to that analogy, consider the saying "two headsbare better than one." When you have two devs working together, they can get through their to-do list quicker and more efficiently than one dev doing everything alone.
In real phone scenario what we could benefit more? Will a quad-core be faster the 2gb of ram? Or will a 2gb will perform better against quad-core?
Pocketnow did a video between the gs2 and gs3 and both were opening apps really quick, they were really close on browsing, gaming. Do you think the 2gb will make a difference on the phone compare to the international? What are your thoughts?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
2GB will help with multitasking while the faster processor will help with gaming and to a degree, faster apps.
If it were an iPhone, then the quad core would be much better because apps will actually make use of the amazing gpu. In android, I doubt there will be an app released in the next year or two that realistically benefits from the quad core's gpu vs the dual core's.
Both the dual and quad core will have all of the software optimizations Samsung has done for web browsing. The 2gb memory is probably overkill at this point, but in theory it means that apps will never close in the background since there will be no need to free up new memory.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
lepapirriky said:
In real phone scenario what we could benefit more? Will a quad-core be faster the 2gb of ram? Or will a 2gb will perform better against quad-core?
Pocketnow did a video between the gs2 and gs3 and both were opening apps really quick, they were really close on browsing, gaming. Do you think the 2gb will make a difference on the phone compare to the international? What are your thoughts?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
muyoso said:
If it were an iPhone, then the quad core would be much better because apps will actually make use of the amazing gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
RandomKing said:
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Well the whole android cant handle 4 cores i think is false because its derived from Linux and i know those who use 4,6,8 core processor's and use Linux. so if android isn't im sure its all in code is all.
2. More Ram does mean things will run much faster. For Example: playing gta 4 with 4GB of DDR3 Ram @ 1333MHz plays decent but my pc setup that plays gta 4 with 8Gb of DDR2 Ram @ 1333MHz plays faster and loads faster but GPU does factor those speeds too so, in a sense you cant bottleneck them.
Extra RAM. It's going to be a while before the apps/software catches up with having two more cores. Meanwhile even old stuff can benefit from extra memory. Also see it as more future proof as you won't get the lame ass excuses from Samsung about it not having enough RAM to run whatever the latest release of Android is like we got with ICS and the Epic 4G.
XxLostSoulxX said:
1. Well the whole android cant handle 4 cores i think is false because its derived from Linux and i know those who use 4,6,8 core processor's and use Linux. so if android isn't im sure its all in code is all.
2. More Ram does mean things will run much faster. For Example: playing gta 4 with 4GB of DDR3 Ram @ 1333MHz plays decent but my pc setup that plays gta 4 with 8Gb of DDR2 Ram @ 1333MHz plays faster and loads faster but GPU does factor those speeds too so, in a sense you cant bottleneck them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've misunderstood. Android can use 4 cores, of course. What it can't do is use them effectively in a way that creates any sort of advantage. But just as a mention, being derived from Linux source does not make it a full-fledged Linux OS by far.
And on your second point, again, you're comparing to a full PC operating system. Up until now, apps have been designed for phones with far less than 1GB of ram. It really depends on how you use your phone as to how much ram is needed. If you have a video editor running in the background, while playing pandora, and emulating Mario 64 you'll need more than simply browsing the web. But the processor, bus speeds, operating system, etc. all factor into how effectively more ram can be used. For Example: A 32 bit computer can't even use more than 4GB of ram. More ram does not simply mean 'much' more more speed, there are many other limiting factors. You can throw all the ram you want at a netbook, it will never run GTA4.
Off-Topic Edit: I vote 2GB ram over Quad-Core.
I guess then the only thing that will "improve", not that the int'l lacks of, is on the multitasking??
The few videos I saw, they were really fast but that's of course without all the apps that a normal user install. Like I have 38 apps install on my phone and most of the time I open between 9 to 13 apps everyday. Most of the time I have to close it...I guess more for the habit of doing it and of courses need it when playing games.
I read the answer and I kinda feel its true, maybe android is not yet ready for such hardware just yet, does it feels the hardware manufacture is going too fast compare to the software?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
lepapirriky said:
I guess then the only thing that will "improve", not that the int'l lacks of, is on the multitasking??
The few videos I saw, they were really fast but that's of course without all the apps that a normal user install. Like I have 38 apps install on my phone and most of the time I open between 9 to 13 apps everyday. Most of the time I have to close it...I guess more for the habit of doing it and of courses need it when playing games.
I read the answer and I kinda feel its true, maybe android is not yet ready for such hardware just yet, does it feels the hardware manufacture is going too fast compare to the software?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There will be improvement between the dual-core, faster processor, and more ram, rest assured!
Although I still recommend closing apps unnecessarily opened to save battery.
2 A15s > 4 A9s.
Also, the A15 use less power. I'd take the 2 GBs of RAM with the newest CPU anyday.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
theking_13 said:
2 A15s > 4 A9s. Also, the A15 use less power. I'd take the 2 GBs of RAM with the newest CPU anyday.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+9000
RandomKing said:
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't have any lag on our epic 4g's? What ROM are you running? I've tried every rom out there and am friends with several other rooted epic owners, none of our phones are remotely comparable to the modern phones like s2 and above.
I'd love to see a video of you opening and running netflix, facebook, web browsing on chrome and stock, or whatever if you have time because this blows my mind. i'm doing something horribly wrong.
Too bad we don't have a samsung developed a15
I don't know why but I don't like qualcomm chips
Also whenever I hear snapdragon I automatically think worse than hummingbird
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I would take the dual core Krait hands down because it is designed from cortex a15. More instruction per clock is better than stacking cores which a phone doesn't even use. I think the 2 gb of ram has more performance advantage.
They also increased the memory bandwidth with new SOC by adding a new dual channel memory controller which the exynos had all along... They fixed alot of the shortcoming of snapdragon processor with the this gen product
gtuansdiamm said:
[...]Also whenever I hear snapdragon I automatically think worse than hummingbird[...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because Hummingbirds rape Snapdragons. See the following:
Either way if you want LTE at the moment you are stuck with dual core. So the 2GB of RAM is a nice enhancement. The EVO 1x ended up as two models the 1X which is quad core with no LTE and the 1XL which is dual core with LTE.
Sent from my PantechP4100 using xda premium
RandomKing said:
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where the hell did the epic4g or the iPhone 4 come into the question? My point was that iPhones actually make use of their gpu's better than android phones do, so the difference between the quad core and the dual core gs3 should be minimal in that regard, at least for a while.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
noobnl said:
I would take the dual core Krait hands down because it is designed from cortex a15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is wrong.
The Krait is very much designed from the Cortex A9. While it shares similarities with the A15, it is not quite as powerful.
Krait is about 60% of the way between the A9 and A15.
jnadke said:
This is wrong.
The Krait is very much designed from the Cortex A9. While it shares similarities with the A15, it is not quite as powerful.
Krait is about 60% of the way between the A9 and A15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, where'd you even get that from? Krait is slightly below an A15, Qualcomm derived their design from it. Yes, its not a true A15 core. But its the best right now in production.
Qualcomm has a license to mess around with ARMs designs and make their own CPUs, not just copy and slap an "A4" on them like Apple does.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
theking_13 said:
No, where'd you even get that from? Krait is slightly below an A15, Qualcomm derived their design from it. Yes, its not a true A15 core. But its the best right now in production.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting how someone "Likes" wrong information.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4940/qualcomm-new-snapdragon-s4-msm8960-krait-architecture
Designing a processor takes an extremely long amount of time. A15 was just barely released a few months ago. No way Krait was designed from it.
Now, Krait borrows some features from A15, but it's missing some important features as well. Krait does feature an extended instruction pipeline over the A9 (11 vs 9 cycles), but it's nowhere near as long as the A15 (15 cycles). Strictly speaking, lengthening a pipeline is less work than shortening it, hence Krait was not designed from the A15.
It's more likely Krait is an evolution of the Scorpion than anything.
As far as Apple, they have no place in this conversation, but if you must.... while they do have a "processor-only" license with ARM, they do farm out to a company to change some transistor signaling to make it more power efficient (they later bought them).
2 years ago, Apple bought Freescale, the only remaining PowerPC processor design company. (aside: The defense industry was largely concerned, as they rely on PowerPC for their power-efficient but high-speed applications). Anyhow, I wouldn't be surprised if they have an architecture license now so they can design their own ARM processors, Qualcomm-style. The main advantage would be integrating LTE radios like Qualcomm does.
Coincidentally it takes about 2 years to fully design a processor.
So I've been noticing somethin strange other then the experia z every single other high end device that will come out as of 2013 will be using a 1.7GHZ snapdragon the only high end device that will use a lower one is experia z why????? I mean the phone hasn't come out yet can't they just put the 1.7GHZ instead? why use a lower one 1.5GHZ from phones of the fourth quarter of 2012 its old tech!!!
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Calm down man, 1.5GHz quadcore is good for Android. Android really doesn't need such a high speeds
And CPU clock doesn't mean smoother device
Sent from my LT26i using xda app-developers app
1.5Ghz Quad Core is not "only". And they all use exactly the same CPU which operates with 1,5-1,7Ghz speed. Clock speed isn't everything. Look at the iPhone - it uses dual core 1.2Ghz CPU - yet its performance is 5 times smoother than most quad core devices...
Dual core is more than enough for anything a smartphone might need to do - as long as you put good software on it.
gabrielpina4 said:
So I've been noticing somethin strange other then the experia z every single other high end device that will come out as of 2013 will be using a 1.7GHZ snapdragon the only high end device that will use a lower one is experia z why????? I mean the phone hasn't come out yet can't they just put the 1.7GHZ instead? why use a lower one 1.5GHZ from phones of the fourth quarter of 2012 its old tech!!!
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously? "Only" on a quad core 1.5ghz CPU for a smartphone? What are you gonna run on your phone that would require you more? Or do you just want your battery to drain more for no possible reasons? Some users even just underclock for the sake of saving battery.
If you ask me I buy this because of the features and the RAM not because of processor clock.
If you ever let me choose I would rather go for a 1ghz dual core processor with 4GB RAM than having a 2ghz quad core processor with 2GB RAM.
The only reason why I would want the Qualcomm S4 Pro processor is because of adreno 320.
A dual core is good enough dude .. this is a quad core lol
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
No offense but you just sound like your trolling. Same goes for your other thread too
AK4TAY7BEN said:
No offense but you just sound like your trolling. Same goes for your other thread too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I think he's trolling.
Riyal said:
Seriously? "Only" on a quad core 1.5ghz CPU for a smartphone? What are you gonna run on your phone that would require you more? Or do you just want your battery to drain more for no possible reasons? Some users even just underclock for the sake of saving battery.
If you ask me I buy this because of the features and the RAM not because of processor clock.
If you ever let me choose I would rather go for a 1ghz dual core processor with 4GB RAM than having a 2ghz quad core processor with 2GB RAM.
The only reason why I would want the Qualcomm S4 Pro processor is because of adreno 320.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What would be the purpose of 4GB of RAM in a smartphone are you running Photoshop or a VM? Where did this stigma that more cores is equivalent to less efficient power use. More asynchronous cores allow for more accurate scaling of processing power to needs, thus higher power efficiency because the CPU spends less time in higher power states.
REAVER117 said:
What would be the purpose of 4GB of RAM in a smartphone are you running Photoshop or a VM? Where did this stigma that mire cores is equivalent to less efficient power use. More asynchronous cores allow for more accurate scaling of processing power to needs, thus higher power efficiency because the CPU spends less time in higher power states.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Buddy android runs Dalvik VM and our GPU uses dedicated RAM for processing certain graphic tasks. So yes we are running a VM on our mobile phones.
Also with a proper monitoring app you could see for yourself which uses more and needs more resource here. whether processing or memory.
Didn't you even wonder why our phones consume almost 700mb RAM without even a single foreground application open? Yet it sits idle in a single core and remains in between 400mhz+ to 900mhz?
Also I didn't say that more cores consumes more power in my statement but still since each core requires power to run it should also consume more. Also I didn't mention anything about number of core I was talking about the clocks. Since the higher the clock requires more Amperes. Still underclocking your phone by 500mhz would prolly just save about 2% of your battery anyways.
you don't need higher cpu clock to get a pocket heater for this winter
My Optimus G has the same cpu an the thermal throttling is kikin in pretty fast. This 1.7Ghz S4pro will thermal throttle as fast or even faster, rendering numerical advantage meaningless.
I don't want to feed the troll but I also think dual core is good enough.
Riyal said:
Buddy android runs Dalvik VM and our GPU uses dedicated RAM for processing certain graphic tasks. So yes we are running a VM on our mobile phones.
Also with a proper monitoring app you could see for yourself which uses more and needs more resource here. whether processing or memory.
Didn't you even wonder why our phones consume almost 700mb RAM without even a single foreground application open? Yet it sits idle in a single core and remains in between 400mhz+ to 900mhz?
Also I didn't say that more cores consumes more power in my statement but still since each core requires power to run it should also consume more. Also I didn't mention anything about number of core I was talking about the clocks. Since the higher the clock requires more Amperes. Still underclocking your phone by 500mhz would prolly just save about 2% of your battery anyways.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have yet to see my Xperia ZL have less than 800MB of free an extra 2GB would be a total waste. And you simply stated you'd rather have a dual than a quad, peak frequency means very little except for potential processing power. Just because your CPU is capable of a higher clock speed doesn't mean it will idle any higher. Likewise the only difference between a quad with a single utilized core and a dual with a single utilized core is the minute amount if extra leakage current for the quad.
I think you meant to say that higher frequencies may need more voltage, amperage has very little to do with CPU frequency scaling.
And obviously the memory overhead for a virtualized process i.e. Dalvik VM is not even in the same league as a system VM.
REAVER117 said:
I have yet to see my Xperia ZL have less than 800MB of free an extra 2GB would be a total waste. And you simply stated you'd rather have a dual than a quad, peak frequency means very little except for potential processing power. Just because your CPU is capable of a higher clock speed doesn't mean it will idle any higher. Likewise the only difference between a quad with a single utilized core and a dual with a single utilized core is the minute amount if extra leakage current for the quad.
I think you meant to say that higher frequencies may need more voltage, amperage has very little to do with CPU frequency scaling.
And obviously the memory overhead for a virtualized process i.e. Dalvik VM is not even in the same league as a system VM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Buddy that 800mb is without running any foreground applications other than either Settings app or the homescreen. Like I said try running some monitoring apps on the background and try using the browser then maybe try loading some sites with lots of javascript codes in it.
Or if you like try launching 4 types of angry birds and the 2 temple run games simultaneously without killing one of them and let's see if OOM doesn't kick in and kill any of them.
Regarding CPU cores please state something that requires a quad core processor. The smoothness of the UI your experiencing is because of the type of processor your phone is using "The Snapdragon S4 Pro" even if you disable all the extra cores in it you won't feel anything different unless of course you'll run some benchmark tools or video decoding stuffs in there.
And just FYI more cores doesn't mean greater processing power. It's more cores = more processes it can handle.
And on the CPU freq clocks who said t that amperes doesn't increase on each frequency table? Please take a look at qualcomm's document on their site regarding it's processors so you would know how they calculate it. Voltage is just used to provide more electricity to power up the processor but voltage alone won't make a processor active.
This discussion is going to the wrong way.
Thread closed.
Which processow will be better, Exynos 5 Octa or A simple Snapdragon 600 quad?
In my POV, Octa will be useless since it will be a battery hog and no apps really use that much cores and power. The S600 will be more efficient for day-to-day use since it consumes less power and will actually be used.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Sent from a dark and unknown place
Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 P3100
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
AndreiLux said:
Misconception #1: Samsung didn't design this, ARM did. This is not some stupid marketing gimmick.
Misconception #2: You DON'T need to have all 8 cores online, actually, only maximum 4 cores will ever be online at the same time.
Misconception #3: If the workload is thread-light, just as we did hot-plugging on previous CPUs, big.LITTLE pairs will simply remain offline under such light loads. There is no wasted power with power-gating.
Misconception #4: As mentioned, each pair can switch independently of other pairs. It's not he whole cluster who switches between A15 and A7 cores. You can have only a single A15 online, together with two A7's, while the fourth pair is completely offline.
Misconception #5: The two clusters have their own frequency planes. This means A15 cores all run on one frequency while the A7 cores can be running on another. However, inside of the frequency planes, all cores run at the same frequency, meaning there is only one frequency for all cores of a type at a time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
I hope that the overclocking or higher clock rate doesn't produce Moment-esque results.
Alsybub said:
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
crawlgsx said:
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. I see. Different hardware for different regions. Like the One X.
Even though it's eight cores it is probably complete overkill. Yet another bigger number to put on marketing. How many apps will actually use that? How many apps use four cores at the moment?
There have been some articles about multiple cores being more for point of sale than for the end user. Even if you're signing up for a contract right now I doubt that much would be making use of it in two years time. So, the future proofing argument is moot.
It'll be interesting to see. Of course the galaxy builds of Android will use the cores. With things like the stay awake feature and pip it is useful. Outside of the OS I can't see it being necessary.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD
The "octa" core processor is complete bullsh*t. Imo, 2/4 cores are perfectly fine as long as they optimize it and perfect the hardware, why stack 8 cores when only 4 work at one time and no app will use all that power.
They should've focused on design to make it look less like a toy phone and use better finish, instead.
Oh the marketing..
Not HTC or whatever fanboy, just stating my opinion.
rotchcrocket04 said:
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good read, thanks for taking the time to post it. Surprised no-one has mentioned that we need this in our Ones. Would certainly help with the battery.
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Squirrel1620 said:
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Nekromantik said:
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll just stick with the one and wait for the 4.2 update. By then we should have custom kernels to overclock ourselves
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Here you go
Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know all 8 can run at the same time? Has Samsung demonstrated that already? Any links?
Also what would be the speed if all 8 are running at the same time?
Also did you see that an Intel dual core @2GHz beat the Exynos Octa in benchmarks!!! So all 8 cores running at slower speed might not be very good actually. It might even slow down things even more...
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
joslicx said:
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
backfromthestorm said:
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its all about bragging rights really. Same as Samsung is doing with regards to Octa.
The the chip that could run at 3GHz could also very well run at 1GHz at just 0.6V (so consuming far lesser power than anything else in the market). A dual core at 1GHz is still good enough for all mundane tasks like playing videos or internet browsing etc. So in practice it would have been a very efficient solution. It was a real innovation really. Sadly the company did not have money to pour more funds into the program and has shut it.
It was demonstrated at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in february this year.
Anyway point is, we did not need extra set of power efficient cores like Samsung is doing. We ran the same cores that could do crazy high speeds and even crazier power efficient mode! Thats a very neat solution.
Heres a press link: http://www.itproportal.com/2013/02/25/mwc-2013-exclusive-dual-core-st-ericsson-novathor-l8580-soc-crushes-competition-benchmarks/
To quote the article:
A continuous running test monitored by an infra-red reader showed that the 3GHz prototype smartphone remained cooler as it uses less energy and in some scenarios, it could add up to five hours battery life in a normal usage scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no. At least not in my opinion. Octacore means 8 cpu cores on one cpu-chip.
I would see it like this:
You have 2 houses on your lawn which are beside each other. Every house has 4 rooms. You have to switch houses to open up the rooms. Just like the Exynos "Octa" has to, since it cannot run both CPU's at the same time.
If you are in a house with 8 rooms, you cannot simply be in all 8 rooms at once. You can connect the open doors between all the rooms, and since your in that house, you can freely walk in every room. But not with that implementation.
I wouldn't call the Exynos "Octa" an Octacore, its a dual CPU system with a 2x4 cores, with the difference that regular desktop dual CPU systems can use both CPU units at once, but not like the Exynos "Octa". Still, dual quad system comes closer than a pure octacore system.
This is kind of a hybrid. Nice technology for a mobile device, but at the same time, kind of unneeded / inefficient, compared to regular quadcore systems. Even the Tegra 3 system with 4 active cores and 1 companion core for standby tasks seems more efficient (in terms of "used space" and ressources).
Ah well let's see how the supposed and so called "octacore" will score in the future...
processor differences
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
dawg00201 said:
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should be identical. I think its just a manufacturer choice. But it could also be associated to termals or battery.
Cause Samsung took the higher frequency chips, there is the possibility that they also get the "better" chips: Lower Voltage for the same frequency. But thats just an assumption.